The Iowa Republican

« | »

What The Romney Campaign Really Thinks About Iowa

Ever wonder what Romney staffers think about the Iowa Caucuses?  Well, Chris Slick, who was a campaign staffer for Romney in South Carolina in 2008, had some interesting things to say to today.

If you are offended by insensitive language you should stop reading now.

Today is Governor Romney’s National Call Day and we are all dialing for dollars!  Today we demonstrate our ability to raise excessive and ungodly amounts of cash while other candidates are still pattering about in bumfuck, Iowa somewhere. No one can come close to what our machine can do. No one.

Really, Bum#*@% Iowa?

Slick is now the director of online operations for ACT! for America, but obviously has kept in touch with the Romney campaign.

You can always tell a lot about a candidate by the way their staff, or in this case, former staff members, choose to conduct themselves.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Posted by on May 17, 2011.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

Categories: Blogs, Craig Robinson

35 Responses

  1. Wow. So let’s see…Romney’s staffers think all Iowans are backwards hicks.

    Good luck Mitt, your gonna need to raise a *lot* more money than that to get all us dumb hick farmers in bumf@ck to even get you a 5th place showing in the Iowa caucus.

    But you can just claim your loss in Iowa is because of you are a Mormon…and not because of RomneyCare (or should I call it ObamaCare??).

    by Bob Loblaw on May 17, 2011 at 7:47 am

  2. Last week, it was Paul, this week we have Newt and now Romney. Idiots!!!

    by Deace voted for Obama on May 17, 2011 at 7:54 am

  3. He is 100% correct. I was born and lived all my life in Iowa and we, as an entire party and state, are fading into irrelevance as the far right fringe continually hijacks the caucuses. I don’t blame team Romney one bit for calling a spade a spade. Our first in the nation status is leaving this state at BVP’s will.

    by Honest Bob on May 17, 2011 at 8:03 am

  4. @Honest Bob

    He is definitely *not* correct. This is the state that Obama carried, and Bush barely carried. Iowa has traditionally been pretty split. You could argue that we are either extreme left, or extreme right, but I don’t think that’s the case either.

    BVP represents an extreme wing of people. These people live in every state, and are probably 10-15% of the population (the left has their version too…remember they compared the twice democratically elected Bush to the mass murderer dictators Josef Stalin and Adolf Hitler).

    But the truth of it is, “extreme” people vote. Most Iowans do not vote, and even less vote in a primary. So then you get candidates catering to the extreme element b/c they know they will go to the polls and they are easy to outrage with a little push polling and 1/2 truths.

    I mostly vote Republican, and I voted to retain all judges, and against BVP at every opportunity. I support gay rights. I am well educated. I believe in small government and individual liberty. I do *not* live in Bumf@ck. 

    Oh, and I will nearly certainly not be voting for Mitt Romney after hearing this.

    by Bob Loblaw on May 17, 2011 at 8:14 am

  5. Honest Bob is correct.  Steve Deace/BVP/IFPC and their adoring throngs of zombies have caused this, and as such, Iowa’s influence is most certainly on the wane.  Sometime over the next two cycles, when Iowa completely fades to irrelevance, people will wonder what happened.  We need look no further than the above group to understand why we find ourselves in that position. 

    Having said that, this staffer should be canned by Romney for allowing this to happen.  Right or not, it’s a  monumentally bad move politically. 

    by Mr. Hawk on May 17, 2011 at 8:21 am

  6. @ Bob Loblaw: You and I are exactly the same based on your second to last paragraph. I do not live in Bumf@ck either. However, BVP and his cronies do and that is precisely what this post was referring to. “Bumf@ck” is where the GOP 2012 field is pandering and it is beyond sad for those candidates to play in to the fringe’s ill-concieved prestige. The well educated republicans in the urban centers are being circumvented by uneducated, bible thumping, idealists. Look no further than Kim Pearson. In 2008, Huckabee was always an irrelevant candidate. If Iowa supported Romney the first time we may not have Obama today. I’m not going to contribute to our slipping grasp on first in the nation by avoiding Romney a second time

    by Honest Bob on May 17, 2011 at 8:22 am

  7. Romney is a terrible candidate. I would have far more respect for him if he said he thought national health care was a good thing, rather than running from his record. The same goes for his supposed abortion conversion.

    Think of it this way; if Romney was a great candidate wouldn’t he be demolishing this field of candidates? I agree the caucas system is set up for people on the extremes. Look at how well Pat Robertson and Alan Keyes did. This didn’t stop GHWB and Bob Dole from competing here and going on to win the nomination easily.

    by Nimitz on May 17, 2011 at 8:27 am

  8. @Honest Bob said: “Our first in the nation status”…..

    You presume that conservative issues are driving out Iowa’s “first in the nation” caucus scheme and tossing out mainstream candidates. This theory presumes Iowa was chosen “first in the nation” by the political parties, Republican-Democrat, based on an assumed theory that Iowans might have superior political intellect, or that Iowans meet some demographic polling matrix or that flyover country deserves a say in who America selects as their national leadership. None of that is true. It is a theme shared by both parties in Iowa which is why the Register and Iowa media repeats this lie over and over and over and over.
    Romney is avoiding Iowa because RomneyCare is a political issue that is not going over well with fly-over. It will go well on the East Coast where the number of federal employees and retirees are 8,000 times what they are here.

    by woodman on May 17, 2011 at 8:46 am

  9. Agree in part with Mr. Hawk. The staffer needs disciplined in some way, totally out of line. That said, I can understand the frustration if their camp shows up here and in the heat of a campaign, they encountered some religious bigotry from over-zealous staffers for others. It probably cements some of their predisposed notions. I caucus. I hear conversations that are pretty close minded. It’s unfortunate. I won’t hold this against Romney, but I AM hoping for a Daniels candidacy.

    by odetocentipede on May 17, 2011 at 11:27 am

  10. @Honest Bob… location has nothing to do with what you consider fringe… no need to do your own stereo-typing.

    by odetocentipede on May 17, 2011 at 11:30 am

  11. Western Iowa = Fringe

    by Honest Bob on May 17, 2011 at 11:54 am

  12. I really question this article.. I don’t even believe that’s what the staffer said. Why would he say that??.. This is def he said she said.. Journalism is dead!!

    by micaelarylie on May 17, 2011 at 12:10 pm

  13. As a Mitt Romney supporter from Massachusetts, I will say that I admire Iowa for its family values and strong community. What Chris Slick said is reprehensible. I condemn him for this statement.

    You can be rest assured that Mitt Romney does not believe what Chris Slick said. Otherwise, he wouldn’t have spent so much time campaigning in Iowa in 2008, and he wouldn’t be promising to campaign there this time.

    by Sam on May 17, 2011 at 12:10 pm

  14. Craig — So, let me see. You quote someone, who use to be a campaign staffer in 2008, as if he were still associated with the Romney campaign of today. Then you make the statement that “Slick is now the director of online operations for ACT! for America, but obviously has kept in touch with the Romney campaign.” Where’s the proof he’s kept in touch? Ever cross your mind he may have an agenda of his own?

    by dcMike on May 17, 2011 at 12:16 pm

  15. > as if he were still associated with the Romney campaign of today.

    Not “as if” he were associated. The quote, which Craig cites demonstrates that Slick *is* associated with the campaign because he is raising money for Mitt Romney:

    “Today is Governor Romney’s National Call Day and we are all dialing for dollars!” Slick continued.”

    So unless Romney doesn’t accept this money, then they are *still* associated.

    by Bob Loblaw on May 17, 2011 at 1:46 pm

  16. Blaming Romney’s inability to do well in Iowa on BVP is laughable.

    The reason Romney didn’t do well in Iowa is because the longer you were around him the more fake he felt. On top of that, in 2008, he said he believed certain things that were inconsistent with his record as Governor of Massachusetts.

    You BVP haters can’t have it both ways. He can’t be both
    A) a radical leader of a fringe group of voters that comprises a small minority of the electorate,
    and B) influential enough to defeat Mitt Romney and his 15:1 outspending of Huckabee in 2008, and therefore, at least somewhat responsible for Romney not playing in Iowa this year!

    You’re talking in circles, folks, and it doesn’t add up.

    by cnsrvtv on May 17, 2011 at 2:57 pm

  17. Woodman said:

    “Romney is avoiding Iowa because RomneyCare is a political issue that is not going over well with fly-over. It will go well on the East Coast where the number of federal employees and retirees are 8,000 times what they are here.”

    I agree … this is another reason Romney is skipping Iowa.

    I honestly wish Romney was a great candidate – genuine, not a big-government statist, not squishy on social issues – I really do wish he was solid. I’m looking for a candidate to support and I don’t see any out there worthy of my support yet. Romney looks the part, and he seems to be a decent family man, but he doesn’t cut it.

    by cnsrvtv on May 17, 2011 at 3:08 pm

  18. @cnsrvtv
    BVP is not influential. Steve Deace was. Steve Deace did all he could to legitmize a brain dead hack like BVP and in doing so, championed BVP’s candidate and turned the knives towards the only pragmatist in the race.

    So to your point: BVP IS a radical and his inflated, unfounded influence in 2008, through Deace’s beloved Huckabee, is waning by the minute.

    Unless, of course, he can manage to lose ANOTHER election. Then he’ll be the more powerful than he ever was..

    by Honest Bob on May 17, 2011 at 3:16 pm

  19. So, Honest Bob, answer me this? If he’s not influential, how do you justify this statement, which you wrote?

    “Our first in the nation status is leaving this state at BVP’s will.”

    You make no sense, man. You may be honest, but you’re not very bright.

    by cnsrvtv on May 17, 2011 at 3:45 pm

  20. BVP and Steve Deace are so far to the right they turn 85% of the Republicans off. The Majority of voters who will vote for a person, over a party affiliation would never vote for a far right candidate such as BVP or a far left such as the President Obama we saw the last two years. Candidates will look to align themselves with people that are more centered in there opinions.

    BVP and Steve Deace are damaged goods. The smart candidates will stay away from both of them.

    by iowaresident on May 17, 2011 at 3:47 pm

  21. @CNSRVTV

    BVP is not singlehandedly causing us to lose the caucuses but the ideas that he and Deace promote to their zombies certainly are. The no-compromise BS that that wing of the party professes is having a dangerous impact on the legitimacy of Iowa on the national political scene and for that we will lose our status.

    But hey, I hear if you insult a faceless blogger’s intelligence you win by default. So don’t worry, we will keep our first caucuses forever, scout’s honor.

    by Honest Bob on May 17, 2011 at 3:58 pm

  22. Craig Robinson’s final sentence of this article reads:

    “You can always tell a lot about a candidate by the way their staff, or in this case, former staff members, choose to conduct themselves.”

    And nobody has caught that, particularly with its very specific implied application to Gov. Pawlenty and his house-breaking drunk Iowa staffer.

    by Conservative Demo on May 17, 2011 at 5:12 pm

  23. This is silly! Chris doesn’t work for Mitt, and it should matter if he did. He doesn’t speak for the campaign or for the candidate, he is a volunteer. He was excited about yesterdays fundraising #’s and as we all know an excited volunteer can say stupid things. In this case, very stupid.

    by Luke on May 17, 2011 at 5:29 pm

  24. Craig,

    Thanks for making things up that don’t actually exist in reality. I worked for Governor Romney 4 years ago. I have not spoken with him since. To somehow insinuate that Romney and his camp have any disdain for Iowa beyond your pathetic blog is reprehensible. My comments are mine and mine alone. I stand by them. My father was born in Waterloo, Iowa. He left, never came back. There is a reason. Your state is boring. Like you’ve NEVER heard that before? I’m glad I could be a beacon of truth for you in your dark world. Your state is losing credibility every single year in the nominating process – as it should. I live in Florida (not SC) and we are gaining every year. McCain skipped you last cycle (AND won the nomination). every major pundit knows that is was also Florida that gave McCain his victory. Need I say more? You people need to get over yourselves. Some may not like me because I am brash but I will always speak my mind to you I would say get thicker skin or don’t be a part of the political process. Your article gave me a good laugh though, Craig, I must say.

    by chris_slick on May 17, 2011 at 5:31 pm

  25. Willard Romney’s biggest problem is Willard Romney, end of story!!!(Never mind that I seem to remember a movie back in the 70’s about rat called “Willard”. Coincidence???)

    by Timmy on May 17, 2011 at 5:32 pm

  26. The other problem is he has half a point. Iowa(bumf**k and the rest of it) seems to have raised a crop of Republicans that at best do not reflect the rest of the country and at worst are completely effing nuts!!!

    My guess that 2012 will be the last hurrah for Iowa’s “first in the nation” status, we just don’t seem to fit into the mainstream of what the rest of the American people want and judging by the field of GOP candidates so far won’t pick the front-runner once again!

    by Timmy on May 17, 2011 at 5:39 pm

  27. so one former staffer speaks for the campaign? pawlenty’s staffer tries to break into a house and thats ok? or how about huckabee refusing to say that mormans are christians? does that mean all of us iowans believe that mormans aren’t christian?  

    by hawkrepub on May 17, 2011 at 5:57 pm

  28. Hey chris_slick –

    Congratulations on your state, in your view, giving us John F. McCain as a nominee in 2008. That’s really something to be proud of.

    I wish there were more states like Iowa that terrible candidates like McCain (and Romney?) would skip, and fewer states like Florida that would coronate losers as the Republican nominee.

    Just sayin’.

    by cnsrvtv on May 17, 2011 at 10:20 pm

  29. Chris; A few weeks before the Iowa caucus 2008, a rather large group of high level political operatives from Washington DC came to Iowa to stage a very effective last second charge for McCain. I met with some of those people, including former high level national officials who worked for papa Bush and Reagan. They worked Iowa very fast and furious, and made appearances at scores of precinct caucusses they mapped out which attracted large turnouts. McCain’s respectable finish in Iowa kept him viable around the nation.

    by mainstreet merchant on May 17, 2011 at 11:43 pm

  30. Romney has every reason to skip Iowa. He is a big government RINO who will say anything to get elected, gave the world RomneyCare, and has no core beliefs. When he lost last time, he blamed it on anti-mormon sentiment, which is just childish. That’s why 2008 was so pathetic — Romney and McCain HATED each other, but were two peas in a pod. Just a couple of faux conservatives who would say anything to get the nomination.

    by Rorkes Drift on May 18, 2011 at 8:04 am

  31. And if he skips Iowa..his campaign is pretty much toast right out of the gate.   If Romney can’t handle taking some heat in little old Iowa, then he’s not going to be able to stand up to the pressure in the rest of the country.
    I’ve said it before..and I’ll say it again.  Iowa isn’t about winning the caucus…its about meeting expectations.  In 2008–Everyone expected Romney to walk to an easy Iowa victory.  He spent a ton of money..had a huge caucus staff, and a decent grassroots organization.   Instead he came in 2nd and it pretty much laid a mortal wound on his campaign.
    Now, this time around, no one expects him to do well…so if Romney is smart, his campaign will understand that as long as they beat the expectations this time around, that will build momentum nationally for him.

    Do i expect he’ll do that?  Nope. 🙂

    by CVN 76 on May 18, 2011 at 8:25 am

  32. Let’s also not forget that McCain did not “skip” Iowa by choice. The free-spending McCain was shelling out big bucks in Iowa for staffer etc. until he ran out of money, had to greatly scale back his campaign, and take out a multi-million dollar personal loan just to keep a skeleton campaign crew on board nationally.

    McCain’s intention was to play in Iowa all along. The only reason he pulled most of he resources from Iowa for a while is because he couldn’t bay the bills anymore. Not because he really was planning to “skip” Iowa.

    by Scott M on May 18, 2011 at 12:36 pm

  33. And whoever he works for, Chris Slick out to be fired for being so stupid as to reinforce his middle-school insults of an entire state in writing for all the world to see.

    Whatever fundraising consultant he’s working for (who just happens to be fundraising for Mitt) ought to know when to pull the plug on this live wire. Can we say, liability?

    by Scott M on May 18, 2011 at 12:39 pm

  34. Very true, Scott M.   In fact, McCain’s last minute scrambling in Iowa is likely what kept his campaign afloat to move on to New Hampshire.  If McCain had finished worse in Iowa than he did, it would have certainly hurt him going into NH and beyond.   McCain beat the expectations in iowa in 2008..and that’s what kept him afloat.

    by CVN 76 on May 18, 2011 at 12:41 pm

  35. re: the McCain thing and Iowa… are we forgetting that at Caucus time in ’08, things like Iraq were still big news stories. I’m sure that helped McCain. Had things gone south for the economy then instead of right before the election, I’m sure Romney and Thompson would have fared well compared to both Huckabee and McCain…

    by odetocentipede on May 19, 2011 at 12:27 pm

You must be logged in to post a comment.

« | »

Recent Posts


About The Iowa Republican

Craig Robinson is the founder and editor-in-chief of The Iowa Republican. Robinson got his first taste of Iowa politics in 1999 while serving as Steve Forbes’ southeast Iowa field coordinator where he was responsible for organizing 27 counties. With over eight years of Iowa fundraising experience, Robinson has helped numerous Republican candidates implement fundraising strategies […]more →